InfoSAWIT, JAKARTA — Reports claiming that around 4 million hectares of illegal oil palm plantations occupy conservation areas must be approached with caution and grounded in official data. This clarification is essential to ensure that Prabowo Subianto, policymakers, and the public are not misled by inaccurate and oversimplified narratives.
Based on the 2019 national palm oil data reconciliation conducted by the Ministry of Environment and Forestry together with the Corruption Eradication Commission, Indonesia’s total oil palm area reached approximately 16.37 million hectares. Of that figure, about 3.37 million hectares were identified as being located within forest zones of various classifications. However, this does not mean the entire area constitutes illegal plantations within conservation forests.
In reality, only a small portion of oil palm plantations inside forest zones falls under conservation and protected areas. The breakdown shows that around 1.12 million hectares are located in convertible production forests (HPK), 1.49 million hectares in permanent production forests (HPT), 501,000 hectares in production forests (HP), 155,000 hectares in protected forests, and only about 91,000 hectares in conservation forests.
Therefore, claims stating that 4 million hectares of illegal oil palm plantations exist within conservation and protected forests are inaccurate, disproportionate, and potentially misleading for top-level policymakers. Simplifying a complex land governance issue risks producing policies that overlook legal certainty and principles of justice.
Such misinformation also fuels negative stigma against Indonesia’s palm oil sector and weakens the country’s position in global trade diplomacy. In fact, oil palm plantations located in conservation and protected forests—amounting to roughly 246,000 hectares—represent only a small fraction of Indonesia’s total planted area. These issues should be addressed precisely, using verified data rather than political or ideological narratives.
Moreover, the “illegal palm oil” narrative is frequently used to justify unilateral land seizures by the Forest Area Control Task Force, often without dialogue or resolution mechanisms that recognize different land tenure histories and legal typologies. Public transparency remains limited regarding how seized plantations are managed, including cooperation schemes, accountability of operators, and the flow of revenues into the state treasury.
Ironically, the state often becomes the main economic beneficiary through fines and plantation management—sometimes without court rulings—while Smallholders, cooperatives, and businesses are left facing prolonged legal uncertainty.
There is concern that this narrative has been deliberately mobilized to build public support for repressive approaches rather than equitable and sustainable structural solutions. Indonesia already has multiple policy instruments to address palm oil in forest areas, including distinctions based on tenure timelines, legal subjects, and forest functions.
A one-size-fits-all, punitive approach risks creating new injustices and undermining long-term forestry and plantation governance. What is needed instead is evidence-based policymaking, open dialogue, and a firm commitment to social justice. (*)
Disclaimer: This article reflects the personal opinion of the author and is entirely the author’s responsibility. It has no affiliation with InfoSAWIT.
